- Add a Table control- Add the ID and Result fields to the table detail fields- Set the "Keep together on one page if possible" option in Tablix Properties / General / Page break options- Deploy the report to the report server

Now, when you view the report with Internet Explorer, how long does it take to render and display the report? For me, it takes 20 to 30 seconds, which is terribly slow for 1000 rows.

When you view the report with Google Chrome, how long does it take? For me, it takes about 2 seconds, which is an enormous increase over IE.

I have a report that produces a table with about 2000 rows. In IE8, this report renders in about 75 seconds. In Google Chrome, it renders in 17 seconds.This is on a 2008r2 Server running SQL Server 2008r2.

I don't know if it's a problem with IE specifically, I'll have to go test now, but we've had some issues with reports running ridiculously slow once deployed, when they run fine in BIDS. To fix that, the common workaround seems to be (after googly-moogling )to pass the parameters into your sp, then immediately store into local variables, and use the local variables to retrieve the data.

Not sure why that works, sounds sorta like parameter sniffing problems, but you're still using a variable, so no idea how that would fix the problem.

Our system is using the MS ReportViewer.Webforms object to populate an ASP response page with the report contents. There is great variation in the javascript processing time between the various versions of IE. When we used the 2005 version of the reportviewer object. a report would render in about 20 seconds. When we switched to the 2010 version of the report viewer, IE8 rendering times jumped to 75 seconds. This is all using the same version of Windows and SQL Server. (2008r2 for both) I discovered that our system was causing IE8 to force IE5 emulation mode when rendering the report. Using IE7 emulation mode reduced the rendering time to 40 seconds, IE8 standards mode reduced this down to 30 seconds. These two pages helped me to sort out what was happening.http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc288325(v=VS.85).aspx http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd565628(VS.85).aspx#browsermodes

I am having the same problem with one of my larger reports on SSRS 2008 R2, but when I work through your example I am not seeing the expected performance lag. Therefore here are my questions:

What version of the BID client tools were used to develop the example report? (Reason: When working with MSFT in the past, I believe they mentioned something about an issue with the keep together option and converting SQL 2005 RDLs to SQL 2008 R2. The bad conversion could be causing your IE browser to eliminate IE 5 browser.)

Have you applied any CU patches to your SSRS server? (Reason: I think CU3 has a fix a parameter bug KB#2276203.)

Can you post the RDL file?

What version of SQL is your data source connecting using? (The TSQL has to run on some platform.)

We had the same problem with slow spped when rendering SSRS 2008 R2 reporst on IE8, particularly reports with parameters. MS do not have a fix and we are now rendering our reports using Firefox which has resolved the speed issue. One drawback with Firefox is that the back arrow does not return a sub report to the previous page.

Thanks for your input. The version of BIDS reported when I go to Help About is: Microsoft Visual Studio 2008 Version 9.0.30729.4462 QFE Microsoft .NET Framework Version 3.5 SP1The report RDL was developed on this version of BIDS, it hasn't been converted.

I've attached the RDL file of the report (saved as a .TXT file).

No CU patches have been applied to out server.

The SSRS is running an SQL 2008 R2 and the report is pointing to the same server.

I am having an issue with rendering a report in Internet Explorer. When the report is displayed in Print Layout in Visual Studio it displays about 500 pages which works fine, but in the Report Viewer in Internet Explorer the report defaults to the standard layout which hangs because it is trying to render all the pages into one. Is there a way around this?